"Spending more on health care sounds like it should improve health, but our study suggests that is not the case and social spending could be used to improve the health of everyone," says Dr. Daniel Dutton, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta. "Relative to health care, we spend little on social services per person, so redistributing money to social services from health care is actually a small change in health care spending."
Health care costs are expanding in many developed countries like Canada, and governments are seeking ways to contain costs while maintaining a healthy population. Treating the social determinants of health like income, education, or social and physical living environments through spending on social services can help address the root causes of disease and poor health. However, health spending continues to make up the lion's share of spending.
[...] The commentary author suggests governments should allocate social spending fairly for both young and old to ensure that the younger generation is not being shortchanged.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180122104016.htm
[Related]: The need for health in all policies in Canada
(Score: 5, Insightful) by HiThere on Wednesday January 24 2018, @12:53AM (3 children)
There are definitely social services that could be improved that would help keep a population healthier, so that there would be less need for medical services. But those aren't the social services that typically get the money. E.g. football stadiums don't do nearly as much good for a population as 1/10th the amount spent on local basketball courts open for 24 hour use.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 24 2018, @02:27AM
Stadiums are one of those things that should really be private (though I allow for modest exceptions in the case of public schools) and which should generate a profit. So they shouldn't be receiving public funding at all in the private cases and little public funding in the public case. Obviously, that doesn't work in practice, but I don't think it's because it's an ineffective social service, but rather for reasons of corruption, incompetence, and status signalling that would hurt any social service in the same situation.
(Score: 0, Troll) by frojack on Wednesday January 24 2018, @03:45AM (1 child)
Basketball courts? Right righter local gang hang out something by the government. Because even grandpa on baby girls can run up and down the court. Unless they get stabbed. But hey HiThere got his favorite pass time funded.
Social services are government social workers intruding into everyone's daily lives, teaching you how to scrub the toilet and showing up weekly to make sure you did it. There's not a shred of evidence they improve any ones health. But the do breed a sense of dependency don't they!
My neighbors got caught up in that racket. The finally moved out of town (while remaining self-employed servicing marine engines) just to get away from the nagging nosy social workers. Now the county busy bodies are on their case.
Victimhood is a full time job.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by rondon on Wednesday January 24 2018, @01:58PM
Giving children something to do besides get in trouble is good, full stop. It doesn't have to be basketball courts, but a well lit slab of concrete with hoops is a common good.